Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL

From: Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jason Earl <jason(dot)earl(at)simplot(dot)com>, Brent Verner <brent(at)rcfile(dot)org>, mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, alavoor <alavoor(at)yahoo(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL
Date: 2002-01-21 17:41:23
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.40.0201211235590.74942-100000@paprika.michvhf.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:

>
> I think, and Vince can correct me if I'm wrong, but Vince is pointing out
> the whole 'Many of the Developers' thing ... if we are (or at least appear
> to be) unanimous in this, then there is nothing to discuss ... if "Many of
> the developers' are uncomfortable, then obviously there are ones out there
> that aren't, and that is where the whole "confrontation" I think arises
> ...
>
> Why does this discussion get started over and over again? Because one
> person brings it up, and those in favor of GPL generally pop up
> thereafter, and it just goes around ...
>
> if we get rid of 'the Many' part, then you are saying "thi sis the way it
> is, this is the way it stays, no discussion" ...

I pondered "many". You can remove it if you wish, but you then paint
all contributers with the same brush and I don't think that's true.
Some being uncomfortable and some not is (imnsho) not confrontational
at all, it merely states fact. If anything should be changed, it's the
word "uncomfortable" is the whimpy one, but it's less confrontational
than dislike, hate, etc.

>
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > It's really noone's business why any of us dislike it. My reasons may
> > > or may not be different than yours which may/may not be different from
> > > Marc's, and so on. Why try to summarize everyone's feelings when it's
> > > unnecessary. My statement never said that we just don't like it, it
> > > was clear that many of the developers were uncomfortable with its
> > > restrictions. Break it down. What are "many of the developers"
> > > uncomfortable with? The GPL's restrictions. What's not clear about
> > > that? It didn't say "many of the developers just don't like it", that
> > > would border on confrontational. You're not going to change the minds
> > > of those that favor GPL just as you're not going to change the minds
> > > of those that prefer BSD.
> >
> > Isn't it the restrictions on proprietary use that we dislike? Seems we
> > should say that in there.
> >
> > --
> > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> > pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
> > + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
> > + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
> >
>
>

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vince Vielhaber 2002-01-21 17:50:20 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-01-21 17:38:06 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Licence: GNU/GPL

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-01-21 17:49:38 Re: pltlc and pltlcu problems
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD 2002-01-21 17:39:25 Re: pltlc and pltlcu problems